1 2026:CGHC:10769 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10291 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Gupta S/o Mr. Sachidanand Gupta Aged About 41 Years Present Address Aghanpur, Guru Govind Singh Ward, Satyam Sadan, Kangoli, P.S. Bodhghat, Jagdalpur, Baster C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer Jagdalpur, District- Bastar C.G. (P.S. Kotwali Wrongly Mentioned In Order Copy) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.03.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 395/2025 registered at Police Station- Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the applicant, a government teacher, was engaged in investing money in the share market and, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 in the course thereof, approached the complainant, who is also a teacher in the same department, and induced him to invest in the said scheme. On such representation, the complainant allegedly paid a total sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the applicant in different installments. It is alleged that the complainant received certain returns/interest on the said amount for one month; however, thereafter neither any further interest nor the principal amount was returned. The alleged transaction pertains to the year 2023, and subsequently the complainant lodged a report, on the basis of which the FIR came to be registered and the applicant was arrested. During the course of hearing, it has also come on record that other persons had similarly invested money in the share market through the applicant. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. It is contended that the applicant, being a government teacher, had himself invested his own money in the share market and had initially received returns for a few months, however, thereafter even his invested amount was not returned, and thus he himself is a victim of the circumstances. It is further submitted that the applicant never induced or allured the complainant or any other person to invest money, rather, it was the complainant and others who, on their own volition, sought information and guidance regarding share market investments and voluntarily entrusted their money for the purpose of investment. It is also urged that the learned trial Court failed to properly appreciate 3 the material on record and that the prosecution has failed to establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offences against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has never been involved in any offence, the charge-sheet has been filed, he is in jail since 29.09.2025, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicant, being a government teacher, abused the trust of the complainant and other persons by inducing them to invest money in the share market on false assurances of high returns, and thereafter failed to return the principal amount after initially paying interest for a short period. It is further contended that the offence pertains to the year 2023 and involves cheating of multiple investors, and therefore, considering the gravity of the offence and the possibility of influencing witnesses, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the allegations against the applicant disclose his involvement in the alleged offence relating to investment of money in the share market, but it is to be noted that the applicant is in jail since 29.09.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed 4 before the competent Court. The applicant is a government teacher with no any previous criminal antecedents and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of detention as well as the fact that the evidence is documentary in nature, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Sanjay Kumar Gupta, involved in Crime No. 395/2025 registered at Police Station- Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan